F-35 Purchase Cancelled; CF-18 replacement process begins

[Derek 2.0]

So where is the appropriation for new aircraft ? Is it just a big DND gift card ?

Hidden in the cushions I suppose?

[bush_cheney2004]

Hidden in the cushions I suppose?

Apparently, Canadians know more about the Pentagon/U.S. Navy's budget and appropriations for follow-on F-18s than we know about this mystery "next gen" CF-18 replacement in Canada...amazing !

Edited November 17, 2015 by bush_cheney2004

[Smallc]

No you didn't......in what fiscal years did the previous Tory Government start funding the F-35?

I will again direct you to the Canada First Defence Strategy, the guiding document of the Conservative effort to rebuild the Canadian Forces. I will do nothing else until you acknowledge the facts, as they exist.

[Derek 2.0]

Apparently, Canadians know more about the Pentagon/U.S. Navy's budget and appropriations for follow-on F-18s than we know about this mystery "next gen" CF-18 replacement in Canada...amazing !

Exactly, as pointed out in the OP, the new program has a staff of three........that is less people than involved in this topic. Furthermore, the young lady put in charge, per her Linkedin account (In the last 24 hours, now page not found ) has little over a decade in experience over at our Department of Fisheries and Oceans, namely in HR.......her education background, includes a degree in Political Science and a member of the volley ball and track & field team.........as it stands, she would be hard pressed to enter most commissioned trades in our air force........

........That, coupled with the cited fiscal plan, and its lack of new funding for fighters, leads me to conclude that there will be no new fighters inside this mandate

edit to link to her account fixed

Edited November 17, 2015 by Derek 2.0

[Derek 2.0]

I will again direct you to the Canada First Defence Strategy, the guiding document of the Conservative effort to rebuild the Canadian Forces. I will do nothing else until you acknowledge the facts, as they exist.

What facts? You provide no facts, you provided a dated doc that doesn't confirm the previous Government was funding an aircraft that it hadn't purchased yet

[bush_cheney2004]

Lots of facts for how bad the F-35 is but nothing for the "cheaper" CF-18 replacement. I guess no "jets" at all will be a lot cheaper.

[segnosaur]

I was fine buying the F-35. We're not. That's settled. There's no use dwelling on it.

Actually there is a point in dwelling on it.

Political parties often like to score cheap political points over military equipment purchases. Even if a particular piece of equipment is necessary or the "best deal", the opposition parties will often condemn those purchases. And because the average citizen has limited understanding of military procurement and/or the true costs of equipment, they can easily get swayed by rhetoric. (The best example was Chretien's labeling of the EH101 as a "cadillac of helicopters".)

By continually pointing out the possible pitfalls of purchasing the F18 Superhornet (as compared to the F35) , we can hopefully get future politicians to recognize that sometimes, cooperation is better than partisanship.

Starting in 2017, 65 next-generation fighter aircraft to replace the existing fleet of CF-18s.

If Canada orders anything other than the F35, then we should be ordering more than just 65.

The reason? Even if Boeing (or SAAB, or whomever we buy the jets from) keeps its production lines open to fill Canada's order, they probably won't keep them open passed that. However, a certain amount of attrition is expected, so we need to order extras now to replace losses in the future.On the other hand, the F35 will likely be manufactured for decades to come. Even if planes are lost in the next decade, we will be able to purchase replacements right from the manufacturer, on an as-needed basis.

[Smallc]

I agree with you. Now, do I think that will happen? Given the current budget, probably not.

[segnosaur]

I agree with you. Now, do I think that will happen? Given the current budget, probably not.

I think one of 2 things will happen:

- Trudeau will go back on his promise to buy something "cheaper" than the F35. The air force will get the planes it needs, but Trudeau's promise of using the savings to rebuild he navy will go up in smoke

- Trudeau will buy something other than the F35. The expected savings won't materialize , but because we've purchased an "orphan" plane, our defense capabilities will suffer. As attrition sets in and he planes start to age, ultimately the cost will be much greater than had they bought the F35.

[Smallc]

I like how under no circumstance does a Conservative ever see the Liberal plan as going well.

[PIK]

We will end up with some old planes being sold cheap. Liberals have never had respect for the military.

[Smallc]

We will end up with some old planes being sold cheap. Liberals have never had respect for the military.

And yet they've committed to fund it as well as the Conservatives (better if they stand by their commitment to not let money lapse - never has so much money lapsed as under the Conservatives).

[Black Dog]

We will end up with some old planes being sold cheap. Liberals have never had respect for the military.

Better they mouth platitudes about supporting the military while letting its capabilities atrophy like your boy Stephen Harper did, eh?

[Big Guy]

Better they mouth platitudes about supporting the military while letting its capabilities atrophy like your boy Stephen Harper did, eh?

I would support any party which would prioritize domestic challenges over the military. If our government would have used those $billions wasted on Afghanistan and now Iraq/Syria then our infrastructure would have been repaired and the quality of life of Canadians improved.

These Liberals are starting to move in the right direction but there is still a long way to go.

[Smallc]

I would support any party which would prioritize domestic challenges over the military.

Every government has done that. We fund our military at just over half the level we committed to.

[Big Guy]

Every government has done that. We fund our military at just over half the level we committed to.

Who committed us to what spending?

[Smallc]

Who committed us to what spending?

As a member of NATO, we have committed to spend 2% of GDP on defence. With current spending levels and committed future increases, we'll be spending about 1.1% of GDP - about the average that we have over the last 20 years.

[Big Guy]

I think we spend far too much on our military:

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/canadian-military-spending-by-the-numbers

We can change our commitment at will with any change in government.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-calls-for-rise-in-defence-spending-by-alliance-members-1434978193

Edited November 17, 2015 by Big Guy

[Smallc]

I think we spend far too much on our military:

you're probably pretty alone in that assessment. We are a G7 nation and can afford to do more.

[Big Guy]

you're probably pretty alone in that assessment. We are a G7 nation and can afford to do more.

I may be but what difference does that make. Majority view is not necessarily the right view.

As a Canadian taxpayer, my view is that we cannot afford to spend more on anything. What we can do is redirect military spending towards domestic issues to enhance the quality of life for Canadians.

[Smallc]

As a Canadian taxpayer, my view is that we cannot afford to spend more on anything.

My view is that we're probably going to have to, and we'll probably have to have an adult conversation about spending and what we expect from government at some point.

[PIK]

Harper did well with the military, when the previous government gutted it by 30%. And we have all heard liberals before say they support the military, but never do. Chretien sent our people to Afghanistan with no equipment, now that is respect. And then there was the hele deal, to good for our troops, so it was canceled.

Edited November 17, 2015 by PIK

[Smallc]

Harper did well with the military, when the previous government gutted it by 30%.

Harper cut all of his own funding, returning the budget to Paul Martin levels.

Chretien sent our people to Afghanistan with no equipment, now that is respect. And then there was the hele deal, to good for our troops, so it was canceled.

And then there was the F-18 replacement. Harper closed the office.

[Black Dog]

Harper did well with the military, when the previous government gutted it by 30%.

Lowest level of spending on the military as a percentage of GDP since the '30s. $5 billion cut in 2012. No new fighters, no new trucks, no new combat ships or supply vessels, no new helicopters.

And we have all heard liberals before say they support the military, but never do.

Last PM to spend the NATO standard 2% of GDP on the military was...Trudeau.

Learns some facts, silly partisan.

[Derek 2.0]

Last PM to spend the NATO standard 2% of GDP on the military was...Trudeau.

Learns some facts, silly partisan.

Facts indeed.........the only problem, 2% of GDP wasn't the standard, let alone the average during PET's term, when the NATO-European average was over 3%, and the Americans were spending upwards of 6%...... the Mulroney government, that did increase defense spending, even then, only brought us up to 2.1% of GDP.

And of course, only two countries currently spend ~2% of their GDP on defense:

But of course, worldwide, Canada is ranked 16th in total defense spending, putting us behind only a handful NATO countries, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy and Turkey.........all countries, absent Turkey, with far larger economies than ours......

Facts indeed.